The Supreme Court, of the federal united States, hands down Marbury v. Madison, usurping the power to declare acts of Congress unlawful that it feels do not conform to its interpretation of the Constitution: “[T]he United States [is] a government of laws, not men. [A]n act of the legislature, which is repugnant to the Constitution is void.”

       NOTES:

• The power of judicial review, as it is described in “Federalist #78,” properly belongs to juries; the prerogative of the Courts to use judicial review only applies when appellate courts have determined that lower courts have violated the rules of Due Process.  The legacy of this decision has resulted in the Courts “legislating from the bench,” as in Roe v. Wade; or introducing extra-constitutional doctrines such as “one-man, one-vote” as in Baker v. Carr.
• Judicial activists frequently cite “Federalist Essay #78” as the justification for judicial review.  Yet Chief Justice Marshall never cited this in the Opinion of the Court.  The editors believe that what FE #78 refers to is the power of Trial Juries fully informed of their power to judge the law as well as the fact in any case.

       [restored 12/27/2024]

       This was the snake planted in the federalist grass by John Jay, and we can rue it to this day.  Young lawyers are taught that the Law is what the Court says it is.  Law schools teach ConLaw, which is the Annotated Constitution, NOT the Constitution of Original Intent.  Jefferson warned us of the judiciary working like miners and sappers in the night changing the intention of the Law inference by inference, word by word.  IMHO SCOTUS should make no decisions unless approved by a Jury of OUR peers, as the Bill of Rights requires. —- JL